EMA

I've actually found the EMA system to be quite flawed. It certainly was when I was at school/sixth form.

There were kids who you could tell were struggling financial at home, who didn't qualify simply because his/her parents didn't give them any money. They were literally only there because they wanted to learn, and that's the way it should be. Whereas there were a number of students, living in £1million+ homes, driving brand new MINIs who got the £35 or whatever it was back then.

Absurd.
 
well i used to receive ema and then it was wasted on stuff i needed of course including the pens/food etc for college but that was nowhere near 30quid a week.. not all weeks did i receive it.. at 20 now.. i had to apply for ALG (same as ema but for 19+) with my oister costing 15quid a week the 30quid does go from your bank for the college alone.. im quite happy tho cos its my last year.. and next year there will be no EMA/ALG anymore :) i do ride my bmx as much as i can to college (10miles) so i can save up on the travel.. :)


and btw the money does motivate me a bit to get to collage.. even thought i shouldn't need the motivation after all its all for ME and MY future.. not all students get it tho ;)
 
I didn't need my EMA, well I did use it for petrol during sixth form (only claimed it for the duration of my A-levels). I could have got by without it but it did help. But it didn't cost me £30 a week to drive 30 miles.
 
No, EMA was a terrible idea in the first place (think I was vocal on these boards to that extent), this is really more an example of the problem of introducing some form of monetary reward that should never have happened in the first place.

From the current students POV, their peers before them had it, therefore, why don't they get it? In reality most students managed to get to college or 6th form perfectly fine without a weekly stipend beyond what their parents gave them. They went out and got a part time job on the weekends etc.

That's what I did and that was less than 10 years ago...

one of the few good decisions made by the current coalition government and a very bad one made by the previous Labour, paying kids to get an education, sure pay FOR their education or perhaps offer them controlled subsidies when they need it, but just paying cash directly into their account (not even their parent or legal guardians account??), it was plain madness.

Students in a few generations time won't be too bothered it's gone as they never expected it in the first place.
 
I don't get EMA. Spend £13 getting to college every week.

So if it was £20/£30. Would have about half the money left over
 
ghost101 said:
The whole point originally was that it was a bribe to encourage students to do A-levels rather than getting stuck in minimum wage jobs or the dole.

Since they're making post-16 education compulsory, I see no point in it.
Click to expand...

I really don't think that making post-16 education compulsory is a good idea... :(
 
I remember a few people who got ema while i was at sixth form.
They skipped class every week and forged teachers signatures. They were hardly motivated students. They still fooled the guys incharge and got a regular income through EMA

Don't know whether it has changed much in the last few years, but it was an incredibly flawed system at the time. Kids that weren't actually in need of it, got it because they ticked the right boxes. Kids that did need it, didn't get it, because they didn't fall into the right criteria. There were so many factors the system didn't take into account. Pretty unfair all round tbh.
 
Last edited:
You guys forget that the process for applying for EMA is very tough! They check your bank statements, house hold income and more. If you skip lessons you will not get EMA, you must have 100% attendance in lessons and no more than 3 lates a week.
 
oli356 said:
I don't get EMA. Spend £13 getting to college every week.

So if it was £20/£30. Would have about half the money left over
Click to expand...
The £13pw figure has been brought up twice now in this thread, so I'd say it's a reasonable figure (outside of London and other major cities, perhaps).

If someone isn't willing to work two hours a week to cover the costs of attending school and continuing their education, why on earth should the taxpayer?
 
EMA is essentially bribing students to get an education.

Education is about investing in your future, that potential should be the only incentive you need.

Even if you support the concept of EMA, £30/week is far too much and that's before we even mention the known fact it's drug/alcohol/fag money.

A disgusting waste of tax payers money and whilst I completely disagree with the Government's stance on tuition fees, I was thrilled that EMA has been abolished.
 
Also the fact it was tied to parental income was flawed. I knew quite a few public school boys and girls with divorced parents who got the full £30/week.
 
You also get students who get EMA (maybe not the full amount) and when I say why do you need it, they reply with "I spend it on filling the car up with petrol"

I mean ???

If you can afford to buy a car and insure it then you shouldn't be getting any EMA!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom